JavaScript must be enabled to use this chat software. Rams Report Card: "C's" and "D's" result in an "L"

Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Morgantown, WV
    Rep Power

    Rams Report Card: "C's" and "D's" result in an "L"

    Rams Report Card: "C's" and "D's" result in an "L"
    Sunday, Nov. 13 2005

    Bulger played as well as could be expected coming off his shoulder injury.
    Grade: B

    Running back
    Jackson made some good cutbacks, but also made a couple of bad decisions.
    Grade: C+

    Holt missed a couple of balls he normally gets; Manumaleuna's fumble hurt.
    Grade: C-

    Offensive line
    Seahawks DTs again gave Rams fits; Barron struggled at times against Fisher.
    Grade: C-

    Defensive line
    Very little pass rush; Seahawks got rushing yards when they needed them.
    Grade: D

    Tinoisamoa played one of his best games; Coakley's interception gave the Rams a
    chance for TD.
    Grade: B

    Another takeaway for Furrey, but unit gave up too many big plays.
    Grade: D+

    Special teams
    Allen provided a little more spark in return game, but nothing dramatic.
    Grade: C

    Fake FG decision backfired; didn't dial up many blitzes to pressure Hasselbeck.
    Grade: D

  2. #2
    Tony Soprano Guest

    Re: Rams Report Card: "C's" and "D's" result in an "L"

    I agree with you on the DEF Line: Lack of pass rush,, that's a killer, no sacks... Probs against the rush too

    Mike Furrey is going to develop into a very good Free Safety... The guy is a ball hawk and he produces.. Of course, he's a work
    "in progress."

    I think Holt cost us TWO TOUCHDOWNS. Rust maybe? Holt's usually as good as they get.


  3. #3
    general counsel's Avatar
    general counsel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    atlanta, georgia
    Rep Power

    Re: Rams Report Card: "C's" and "D's" result in an "L"

    The receivers deserve lower marks. Agree 100%, the 2 td drops were just huge. the first one changed the entire game. I didnt think the secondary was a d plus, i thought they were better than that. Not great, but a solid c. we had no pass rush at all and under those circumstances, you know we are going to get beat. hasselbeck made some perfect deep throws and their receivers had only one drop all day that i saw. certainly NOT the same old hawks. bulger was better than a b as well and the o line wasnt too bad either.

    ramming speed to all

    general counsel


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts